Browse thread
Scilab: Why not written in OCaml?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Oliver Bandel <oliver@f...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Scilab: Why not written in OCaml? |
Hi,
Zitat von "Philippe Wang" <philippe.wang.lists@gmail.com>:
> Why not use Bigloo? It's a efficient scheme compiler, also developed
> at INRIA.
> http://www-sop.inria.fr/mimosa/fp/Bigloo/
[...]
I looked at bigloo before I came to OCaml.
I decided against it.
Not only because of schem's ((((())))()(()()))))))-terror ;-)
but also (main reason) because of this:
"Bigloo produces C files. C code uses the C stack,
so some programs can?t be properly tail recursive.
Nevertheless all simple tail recursions are compiled
without stack consumption."
This was not really inspiring confidence.
Even if I did not really know much about that topic tailrec-topic,
it seemed to be a basic feature, and other scheme implementations did
not have such a limitation...
...then I had contact to Haskell and Ocaml and decided OCaml to be my
favourite.
I never looked at bigloo again, but that quote above is from the
bigloo-documentation that I just now downloaded to assure the point
has not changed during the last years.
>
> Just kidding,
[...]
oh, I saw this too late;-)
Ciao,
Oliver